From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Alun <alun.linux@ty-penguin.org.uk>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PATCH reduce impact of FIFREEZE on userland processes
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 13:28:53 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121210022853.GO15784@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121208121204.GA18467@infradead.org>
On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 07:12:04AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 11:42:55AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > The problem wth doing this is that the sync can delay the freeze
> > process by quite some time under the exact conditions you describe.
> > If you want freeze to take effect immediately (i.e instantly stop
> > new modifications), then adding a sync will break this semantic.
> > THere are existing users of freeze that require this behaviour...
>
> But that's only because he uses the big hammer sync_filesystem() which
> actually waits for I/O completion. I agree that this is a bad idea,
> but if we'd just do a writeback_inodes_sb() call in this place that
> starts asynchronous writeout I think everyone would benefit.
The problem with that is that async writeback will block on IO
submission as soon as the disk backs up on congestion. It's
effectively still waiting on IO completions to occur, only now
indirectly through the request queue submission process.
Hence I think for the heavily loaded situations that are causing
freeze latency related issues, sync or async pre-flushes are going
to cause exactly the same delays to freezing writes....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-10 2:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-05 21:17 PATCH reduce impact of FIFREEZE on userland processes Alun
2012-12-07 0:42 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-07 8:59 ` Alun
2012-12-08 1:20 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-08 8:47 ` Alun
2012-12-10 2:44 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-08 12:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-12-10 2:28 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121210022853.GO15784@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=alun.linux@ty-penguin.org.uk \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).